PRESCOTT - Despite a Friday morning legal challenge by the Salt River Project that could have halted the process, a three-day appeal hearing on Big Chino water appears to be a go for February.
Sandy Fabritz-Whitney, assistant director of water management for the Arizona Department Water Resources, reported this week that a three-day appeal hearing on her department's November ruling on Prescott's use of Big Chino water would take place on Feb. 9-11.
Meanwhile, the matter went before a judge to begin consideration of the five-count legal complaint that SRP filed Monday against the state and the City of Prescott over that November ruling.
In a Phoenix courtroom Friday, a Maricopa County Superior Court judge denied SRP's request for a temporary restraining order that would have prevented the February administrative hearing from taking place.
In addition, the judge set a preliminary injunction hearing for Jan. 29 to determine SRP's level of involvement in the upcoming administrative appeal hearing.
The legal wrangling centers on ADWR's determination in November that Prescott is entitled to pump 8,067 acre-feet of water per year from the Paulden-area Big Chino sub-basin.
That decision generated a number of appeals, which in turn, led to the scheduling of the February administrative hearing.
But this past Monday, SRP, which claims senior water rights to the Verde River, filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court, maintaining, among other things that the state had "illegally, arbitrarily, and capriciously" excluded the Phoenix-area public utility company from participating in the appeal.
Local officials took a strong stand this week against SRP's action. In a joint statement, Prescott Mayor Jack Wilson and Prescott Valley Mayor Harvey Skoog referred to the lawsuit as "a disingenuous and disappointing tactic," and "an obvious attempt to circumvent the administrative process of a state agency."
Michael Pearce, one of the water attorneys for Prescott and its Big Chino Water Ranch partner Prescott Valley, called the SRP lawsuit "a very aggressive move and not well-founded."
SRP, on the other hand, sees the lawsuit as a way to ensure its rightful involvement in the process.
"We feel we've been wrongfully excluded from the appeal hearing, and that's why we sued," SRP spokesman Jeff Lane said Friday. "As it is currently structured, the appeal does not permit the participation of any person who will be adversely affected by Prescott's planned pumping from the Big Chino sub-basin."
He added: "We're hopeful that the appeal process will ultimately allow us to participate in the process."
Early on, ADWR determined that SRP did not have "legal standing" to participate in the appeal, because state law requires that appellants live in the Prescott Active Management Area.
The hearing on ADWR's November ruling will take place Feb. 9, 10, and 11, beginning at 9 a.m. each day, in building 16 at Prescott's Yavapai College campus, 1100 E. Sheldon St.
The public may attend the hearing, Fabritz-Whitney said, although the judge from the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings will restrict the involvement to the three main parties - the City of Prescott, the other appellants, and ADWR.
Pearce said the city's case would aim to show that Prescott effectively made its case for Big Chino water in its application for a modification in its assured water supply designation.
The city's case also will deal with interpretation of the 1991 state legislation that gave Prescott the right to pump and transfer water from the Big Chino sub-basin - another point that the SRP lawsuit questions.
In the online notice for the February hearing, the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings notes that ADWR received appeals from 17 entities and individuals, who present more than 25 issues on appeal.
Among the issues:
• Whether the water that Prescott proposes importing from the Big Chino would be physically, legally and continuously available for 100 years.
• Whether Prescott demonstrated the financial capability to build the infrastructure necessary to transport the water.
• Whether the decision should consider the impacts on the Verde River.
The plans by Prescott and Prescott Valley to build a 30-mile water pipeline to import water from the Big Chino Water Ranch have long generated disagreement from SRP.
While Prescott bases its plans on the 1991 state legislation, SRP maintains that the water ranch, which is near the headwaters of the Verde River, would impair the river.
Plenty of legal activity already has taken place on the project. City records show that Prescott and Prescott Valley have spent (on a 54-to-46-percent Prescott/Prescott Valley breakdown) $558,000 on legal costs for the project to date.
Jim Holt, Prescott's project manager for the Big Chino Ranch, said estimating future legal costs for the project would be impossible at this point, because the city does not know what its opponents will do.
Reader Comments
Posted: Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
Some say the Salt River Project is trying to steal Prescott's water. It has been a long time since I took civics, but as I remember Arizona follows old Spanish water laws which state that water belongs to the first person to claim it. Thus if you water a field down stream from someone who starts a farm upstream from you, he cannot take the water and leave your field dry. I believe that is where SRP is coming from.
Posted: Monday, January 19, 2009
Article comment by:
We have Been Betrayed
We need to get to the voting booth and throw these pro pipe line people out of office! 1/2 million dollars so far ! for the land owners and developers to ge richer? This is totally crazy. How does one start a recall election?
Posted: Sunday, January 18, 2009
Article comment by:
Nancy Shelton
Wow! $550K in legal fees and there hasn't even been any litigation yet? (up until the lawsuit filed last week.) I can just imagine what the legal fees will be once the municipalities are engaged in actual litigation.
Posted: Sunday, January 18, 2009
Article comment by:
No name provided
The projected cost of this pipeline is right at $200 million, not including legal fees or the cost of the spin doctors they hired. Drop this boondoggle and take the money,over $100 million, and use it to get out of the hole.
Posted: Sunday, January 18, 2009
Article comment by:
JonSE of Prescott
"...Prescott and Prescott Valley have spent (on a 54-to-46-percent Prescott/Prescott Valley breakdown) $558,000 on legal costs for the project to date."
Prescott politicians, don't be asking me to vote for any new taxes. You apparently have plenty of money to waste in the interest of big land owners and developers. You certainly don't need, or deserve, any more of my hard-earned money.
